RihannaMyElegant

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg
Showing posts with label Porn Culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Porn Culture. Show all posts

Sunday, 2 June 2013

Nick Ross: There is no such thing as Child Porn

Posted on 14:51 by Unknown

I didn't think Nick Ross could say anything more offensive but it turns out he's worse than I originally thought. He's not just a misogynist, he's also a racist. I've reproduced the Telegraph article on Ross' appearance at the Hay Festival below. Even if the Telegraph has gone for the most extreme out-of-context quotes, Ross is a deeply hateful man. Ross has gone for the "police aren't institutionally racist, West Indians are more likely to mug people" construction of crime. 30 years as a journalist heading Crimewatch and he thinks that skin colour and community dictates criminality . I would write further about that one comment but, frankly, that's just the level of stupid I would expect from a man peddling rape myths in the Daily Mail.
Ross also suggests he might peruse some child porn, if offered, just to see what the fuss is all about. Yep, he wants to peruse some "child porn" to see what the fuss is about. 
"Child porn" does not exist. 
Ross wants to view images of children being sexually assaulted, raped and tortured just to see what the fuss is about.
He wants to view images of 2 year old children being raped until their pelvises break. 
He wants to view images of a 5 year old child being sodomised.
He wants to view images of a 12 year old child being gang raped.
That is the reality of "child porn"
It is the violent sexual and physical abuse of children.
It is not something that normal people view because they are "curious".
It's what violent, hateful men think is entertainment.
Ross needs to shut the fuck up.

The Telegraph article
Speaking at The Telegraph Hay Festival, Ross, who provoked censure last week with his views on rape, claimed that all humans were essentially curious.
“We’re all inquisitive,” he said. “I had never seen, until I started working on Crimewatch, child pornography.
“I think if someone came to me and said: 'Would you like to see what all the fuss is about?’, I’m sorry, I probably would say yes.”
Ross referred to a study in which internet users clicked on links to extreme pornography even if they had not searched for it.
He said: “Does this tell us that we’re all awful? I think not.”
The presenter courted further controversy when he claimed some races were more likely to commit certain crimes. He argued that there was no evidence of institutional racism in the police force, claiming instead that West Indians were simply more likely to mug people.
Ross had already admitted at the festival that his views were likely to get him into “hot water” again.
Last week, he was criticised for his comments on rape, when he compared “provocatively dressed” women to a bank “storing sacks of cash by the door”.
Yesterday, he urged critics to read his book, Crime and How to Solve It, and Why So Much of What We’re Told is Wrong. He discussed the relevance of race to crime, claiming that particular ethnic minorities had a tendency to commit certain offences.
He said there was no evidence of institutional racism in the police force simply that some minorities were likely to commit certain crimes.
“We’re very bad pickpockets in this country,” he said. “We’re incredibly good at car crime. It does seem that contact crimes of the sort people don’t like, such as mugging, are specifically of some communities from the West Indies.
“Does that mean they’re worse than us? No. Does that mean they’re less moral, than us? No. It just means they’re not very good at pick pocketing, they do this sort of crime.”

Read More
Posted in #rapeculture, Child abuse, Child Rape, Male Entitlement, Male Violence, Misogyny, Porn Culture, Pornography | No comments

Friday, 26 April 2013

Andrea Dworkin's Pornography: Men Possessing Women

Posted on 01:26 by Unknown

Everyone's got an opinion on Andrea Dworkin and it's frequently one based in myth. I love Dworkin's writing. I don't always agree with her (and she's sometime historically inaccurate) but she was an utterly brilliant polemicist. Her gift was amazing. She was a truly brilliant woman.

I've collated some quotes from the text here and here but the full text is available on the online Andrea Dworkin library.





Read More
Posted in #culturalfemicide, #rapeculture, #ReadingOnlyBooksWrittenByWomen, Harmful Cultural Practises, Male Violence Against Women, Porn Culture, Pornography, Violence against Women | No comments

Karen Boyle's Everyday Pornography

Posted on 01:21 by Unknown

Karen Boyle's Everyday Pornography is an inter-disciplinary collection of 13 essays which are situated within the anti-pornography movement. Its focus is on the pornification of mainstream culture but also on the mainstream of pornography; that is to say the heterosexual male audience and the materials created specifically that audience. This is the praxis of the "everyday" of pornography and this is what makes Boyle's book so powerful: it destroys the myth that porn is an isolated part of our culture that we can refrain from being exposed to. Karen Boyle's personal contribution to the book "Porn Consumers' public faces: Mainstream media, address and representation" demonstrates the ubiquity of porn within popular culture through films like American Pie, Showtime's Porn: A Family Business and the extremely tedious program Friends. Sarah Neely examines how pornography and other parts of the commercial sex industry are reflected and constructed within the virtual online reality game Second Life. Meagan Tyler's research focuses on how the porn industry defines itself. Tyler's findings demonstrate that degradation, abuse, and violence are not only common in pornography but that the industry actively promotes it. Lisa Jean Moore and Juliana Weissbein's is a fascinating study of the fetishisation of semen. 

The academic language of the text can make it easier to disassociate from the violence within. In many ways, Everyday Pornography is the perfect companion to Melinda Tankard Reist and Abigail Bray's Big Porn Inc: Exposing the Harms of the Global Pornography Industry. Big Porn Inc. written by a collection of activists and radical feminists. I had a more immediate visceral reactions to the violence committed during the making of pornography in the text Big Porn Inc. Everyday Pornography was easier to process despite the fact that it is equally distressing. 

Everyday Pornography is a necessary read. It is hard but we can not destroy the capitalist-patriarchy unless we understand just how just how it functions: Jennifer Johnson's analysis of porn's use social networking is essential to this understanding.

Read More
Posted in Male Violence Against Women, Misogyny, Porn Culture, Pornography, Violence against Women | No comments

Monday, 22 April 2013

Big Porn Inc: Exposing the Harms of the Global Pornography Industy

Posted on 00:18 by Unknown

Big Porn Inc: Exposing the Harms of the Global Pornography Industry, edited by Melinda Tankard Reist and Abigail Bray, is a collection of articles from radical feminists, activists, and academics who all believe that pornography is not about "pleasure, self-empowerment and freedom of choice"; rather that  pornography represents the systemic subjugation of women as a sex class.  Therefore pornography is not about sex, it is a form of violence against women. I am an anti-porn, anti-sex industry feminist so it's fairly clear that I agree with the basic premise of this book.

I wasn't prepared for what I read. I had already read Gail Dines' Pornland and Robert Jensen's Getting Off. I even attended the Challenging Porn Conference in London in 2011. I already knew the links between pornography and the pharmaceutical/ medical business. I knew how the pornography industry uses "free sites" to suck people into payed-for porn. I knew the violence perpetrated on women's bodies. I knew how porn was predicated on racist constructions of the human body. I thought I understood just how mainstream violent and child pornography actually is. I had seen images I never wanted to see in the first place. I still wasn't prepared for this book.

I wasn't prepared for the soul-destroying mundanity of it all; of realising just well pornography is integrated into the capitalist economy; how horrifically common-place extreme violence is. I wasn't prepared for just how normal porn involving children and teenagers is. I wasn't prepared to read what men do to the bodies of women and children. I wasn't prepared to realise just how many men hate women.

I have  storified some of the quotes I tweeted out over the weekend whilst I was reading here. Allecto from Liberation Collective has written an excellent review here. It includes a graphic description of child rape so please take care before opening this link.

Big Porn Inc is an incredibly powerful book and I'm going to recommend it to every single person who tries to convince that porn is just a laugh and women like being brutally assaulted.



Read More
Posted in Male Violence Against Women, Porn Culture, Pornography | No comments

Monday, 1 April 2013

#ReadingonlyBooksWrittenByWomen : On Pornography and Prostitution

Posted on 00:47 by Unknown

I've been enjoying theme reading these past few months: February was Black History Month in North America and March was, obviously, a celebration of women's history. This month I'm going to read feminist critiques of prostitution and pornography. As ever, I probably won't make it through the whole list but these are the texts I have lined up:

Melinda Tankard Reist's Big Porn Inc.: Exposing the Harms of the Global Pornography Industry
Karen Boyle's Everyday Pornography
Laura Lederer's Take by The Night: Women on Pornography
Jennifer Hayashi Danns with Sandrine Leveque's Stripped: The Bare Faced Reality of Lap Dancing
Trine Rogg Korsvik & Ane Sto's The Nordic Approach: Feminists Write Candidly about the Nordic Battle to Ban the Purchase of Sex
Andrea Dworkin's Pornography: Men Possessing Women
Linda Lovelace's Ordeal 
Linda Lovelace's Out of Bondage
Kathleen Barry's The Prostitution of Sexuality: The Global Exploitation of Women 
Sheila Jeffrey's Anticlimax: A Feminist Perspective on the Sexual Revolution
Christine Stark & Rebecca Whisnant's Not For Sale:  Feminists Resisting Prostitution and Pornography

These are some texts I highly recommend:

Gail Dines' Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality
Robert Jensen's Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity
Ariel Levy's Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture
Julia Long's Anti-Porn The Resurgence of Anti-Pornography Feminism
Melinda Tankard Reist's Getting Real: Challenging the Sexualisation of Girls
Natasha Walter's Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism
Read More
Posted in #culturalfemicide, #ReadingOnlyBooksWrittenByWomen, Porn Culture, Pornography, Prostitution, Women Academics, Women Writers | No comments

Monday, 18 February 2013

Nick Cave is a Better Feminist than Feminists

Posted on 01:47 by Unknown

Obviously, the Nick Cave is a better feminists than feminists theory has been around for a while. He was blithering on about it in an interview in New York Mag in 2010. This is the full quote:
You write a lot about sexual neurosis, which has gotten you into some trouble. Do you consider yourself a feminist?  
Well, I don’t consider myself not one. I’m not a misogynist, so you can dispense with that. I think I’ve done wonders for the feminist movement. I get criticized for a lot of what I write about, but as far as I’m concerned I’m actually standing up and having a look at what goes on in the minds of men, and I have the authority to talk about it because I’m a man. Women don’t have the authority because they don’t know what goes on in a man’s head, so largely what they say is kind of irrelevant. My songs and stories and books are character-driven, they talk about the way people are and the way men are and women are. I’m actually confronting certain issues that some women appear to feel are now redundant.
Bless his little socks. What we think about what goes on in men's heads is irrelevant. I'm glad he thinks that because he won't like what I'm thinking right now. And, I'm sure he understands that I know what he thinks about women is complete twaddle: sexist twaddle at that. I do like the arrogance of Cave's being able to understand what women "are" when women are too incapable of understanding men.

Yep, nothing inherently problematic or anti-feminist with that piece of nincompoopery at all.

And, now, Cave has an awesome new album cover to prove his feminist credentials. One which does not objectify women's bodies in any way. After all, it's totally normal for men to be fully clothed whilst women are naked. And, it's totally normal for the man to be clearly ordering the woman from the room whilst the woman looks ashamed. Covering her face and breasts while displaying her vulva just looks pretty. Or, something.

Normally, this kind of crap bypasses me. I only came across it via Media through a Feminist Lens. I've read a huge chunk of the discussion of this album cover on Nick Cave's FB wall and all I can say is that is full of dingbats and nincompoops. This, however, is the best 'how to miss the point completely comment' by one of his fans on his FB wall: 
"How about waiting to listen to the album BEFORE you decide the image is offensive?"
Honestly, I had to read it about six times before I actually got that the quote was as dim as I thought. I had no idea my listening skills were required to analyse an image. 

You learn something new everyday.

[I am aware that the image is that of Cave's wife. I think that makes it creepier personally but it's the construction of clothed, powerful man and naked, shamed woman which I find so utterly Patriarchal and unpleasant.]


Read More
Posted in #dickheaddetox, #ListeningOnlyToMusicByWomen, Celebrity Culture, feminism, Nincompoop, Porn Culture | No comments

Thursday, 7 February 2013

Anne of Green Gables is a Redheaded Child Not a Blonde Playboy Centerfold

Posted on 02:11 by Unknown

This is the new cover of Lucy Maud Montgomery's children's classic Anne of Green Gables. You remember Anne: a redheaded, 11 year old orphan who hates her hair and who is sent to live with Matthew and Marilla who wanted a boy; a girl who spends the first two books learning to love herself both as a female and one with a red hair. At least, it's been a while since I've read the book but I definitely remember Anne being a redhead and a child; not a retro-Playboy centrefold. I definitely don't remember Anne rolling about in a haystack like a supporting body in Dukes of Hazzard. Being 7 am, I have taken the liberty of checking with Wikipedia  to make sure I'm not completely out-to-lunch with this. They're pretty sure Anne is supposed to a redheaded child too. Now, I do know that Wikipedia isn't always the most accurate source of information but even they can't confuse a redheaded child with an 18 year blonde with breasts being posed in a sexualised manner.

Has it really come to the point that one of the best books written for girls by a brilliant author which has already sold more than 50 million copies and been translated into 20 languages needs to be repackaged as if the target audience is middle-aged men with a teenage girl sex fetish? Because, they've never struck me as the target audience for Anne of Green Gables. And, frankly, everything else in our culture is targeted at them. Why can't girls have one book that doesn't erase our lived experiences?

Why does everything have to reference a pornified, heteronormative sexuality?

Why do we assume young girls won't want to read a book about another young girl, especially since 50 million of us already have, if she isn't sexualised?

FFS, the whole point of Anne of Green Gables is learning to love ourselves even if we have freckles, red hair and aren't called Cordelia. It is not a book about a blond teenager learning to be a sex object. It's a book about a child discovering themselves and loving themselves.

This is precisely the kind of shit which evidences why porn culture is so insidious.

Anne should not pass the Patriarchal Fuckability Test. 

She is a child; to pretend otherwise is disgusting and creepy. 


This is the cover of the edition I have. Notice that Anne is both a redhead and a child; not a blonde woman being posed in a sexualised manner.


Plus, let's be totally honest here, there is NO WAY Marilla would let Anne prance about in a boy's shirt.

This is from the Mumsnet thread I started today. I thought it needed sharing:

FastidiaBlueberry Thu 07-Feb-13 12:04:17
Who is the publisher?

This really is pernicious and a brilliant example of porn culture.

Any child buying this book is receiving the message that being a girl means being sexy before being anything else. Even if the words in the book say something completely different and don't even talk about the need to be fuckable, the subliminal message is that even when you're busy doing other stuff, sexy is where it's at. If this goes on, it will almost be impossible to find pictures of female humans which don't emphasise their fuckability above every other aspect of them. Are we to look forward to a representation of Hermione Granger suggestively holding her wand in her mouth, or near her arse or something, a la 50 shades? WTF?

Who the fuck thought it was a good idea, is the publishing house full of child-molesters or something?

I mean seriously, what possesses an otherwise normal person, to imagine that the best representation of an 11 year old red-haired girl with freckles (something the book is very specific about) is a sexualised picture of a teenager? There's something actually quite sinister about this, what is wrong with the adults who authorised this cover? I really do think they should be forced to make a statement about why they felt it was appropriate to pornify the image of a child on a book whose target market is female children. It's beyond disgusting, it's actually amazing - as if peadophiles are working in the office and deciding the artwork and the normal adults there are accepting the paedophile view of the world, that every child is a potential fuck. 

And of course, we're all going to be told that we're overreacting, it's only a picture and it's fine for 8 year old girls to be brainwashed in this way.

FFS.
Read More
Posted in #ReadingOnlyBooksWrittenByWomen, Canadian Literature, children's literature, Objectification of Women, Patriarchal Fuckability Test, Porn Culture | No comments

Saturday, 19 January 2013

A teacher was fired because she was a porn actress.

Posted on 06:42 by Unknown

So, not only has a junior high science teacher in California  been fired for appearing in a pornographic movie, a three-judge commission upheld her firing. She was fired because the internet means the porn films she starred in will *always* be available to students.

This is the point were I have to make my bias clear: I am anti-porn.  I do not think it's possible to create pornography which is unharmful in a culture which constructs women as a sex class. In a post-patriarchy world things might be completely different. But, we aren't there yet and I do believe that porn, in its current incarnation, is inherently harmful due to its reductive construction of a racist heteronormative sexuality which privileges the male orgasm at the expense of women's physical and emotional well-being.

Being anti-porn is political stance. It is a critique of the capitalist-patriarchal structures which harm us all (within and out with porn).

However, this article isn't about questioning the role of porn in our culture. It's about slut-shaming. It's holding one woman responsible for the ignorance of her former colleagues and the fact that porn culture is so pervasive that students in the middle school where she taught found and watched some of the porn films she was in. 

According to the district superintendent Jeff Chancer  her decision to "engage in pornography was incompatible with her responsibilities as a role model for students,". Stacie Halas did not participate in the porn industry whilst a teacher. She made several films during a 9 month period in 2005 - 2006 because of poverty. She was not showing porn films in her classroom. She was not sharing the porn films with her students. She was not flogging them to her students. She appeared in several movies 8 years ago. And, this is enough to have her fired. 

I clearly missed the module in my education degree which said that only perfect people were allowed to be teachers. 

There is little discussion here of how the students, in middle school, accessed the films. Or, why children were watching porn. Surely, the access children have to porn is far more problematic than one teacher appearing in a porn film. Yes, I get that once the children found out, it would have been harder for Halas to do her job. But, let's be honest here, teenagers are just like adults. They can be equally cruel and a bunch of teenagers writing profanity on the teachers window is part of the job description. It happens even to perfect members of staff who never found themselves broke and taking a job in a porn film. 

Really though, the reason Halas worked within the porn industry is irrelevant for this. It only impacted her job because her co-workers complained to the school administration about it. It only impacted her job because she was fired. Halas was forced out of her job by slut-shaming reactionaries.

I am anti-porn but I can not see how preventing a woman from working as a teacher will end the pornification of our society and the hyper-sexualisation of childhood. This has taught her students that porn actresses are all sluts who do not deserve respect or basic human dignity. It has taught her students that slut-shaming is a perfectly acceptable activity. It has taught her students that it is acceptable to mock those who make different decisions than ourselves. It has taught them that it is okay to humiliate those who have fewer choices than they do. 

This is a horrible story. My sympathy is with Halas and not the slut-shaming, hypocritical arseholes who are preventing her from doing a job she was trained for. More importantly, I wouldn't want my children to be taught by people lacking in both empathy and the critical skills necessary to engage constructively in our Capitalist-Patriarchy. 

And, by the way Huff Post, those "student-teacher sex scandals" at the bottom are cases of child rape, possession of child pornography and other forms of sexual violence. Not "sex scandals". They are also all women; women who are convicted sex offenders. They are not comparable to a woman who used to work in the porn industry. Working in porn is not a criminal offence; raping a 14 year old boy is a crime. Could you at least pretend to keep that straight?

Read More
Posted in #waronwomen, Mass Media, Porn Culture, Pornography, War on Women | No comments

Sunday, 6 January 2013

So, Playboy, Definitely Art. And, other Dubious Statements

Posted on 15:01 by Unknown

Hugh Hefner's 21 year old second son from his second marriage is apparently lining up to take over the company. When he finishes school. Obviously. This rather creepy article in the Independent, which is attempting to pass for news, would like everyone to know that Hef Jr definitely thinks Playboy is art and not pornography. 

I'd like to believe the article's other claim that the Playboy is only a "marginal" brand now but, let's be honest, they aren't making their money from the magazine. Instead, they have been capitalising on ole' Hugh's penchant for sexual violence in reality TV programs like The Girls Next Door. The Playboy Club TV program may have been cancelled in its first season but the Playboy clubs are coming back [and are the focus of some brilliant feminist activism]. Sales of Playboy Magazine itself are falling but Playboy brand merchandising is everywhere. For reasons I genuinely don't get, parents are buying their children Playboy branded duvet covers and notebooks. Playboy merchandise is flaming everywhere and that's without getting into the "sexy" Playboy dress-up clothes.

Ranting about Playboy merchandising on children aside [and I judge parents who buy 6 year olds jeans with Playboy bunnies on their arse or t-shirts which say 'Future Porn Star'. It's not funny or clever. It's just creepy], Cooper Hefner's attempts to rewrite Playboy's past and label their magazines 'art' rather than porn demonstrates some serious cognitive dissonance. Or, nincompoopery. Probably both. Whatever it is, Cooper is just not the brightest of sparks when he's comparing nude art with Playboy centerfolds insofar as he misses the whole freaking debate. Because, there is feminist debate about this and there is recognition that much of the art we admire is of questionable value morally and ethically. Hell, there's a whole lot of recognition that some of the artists whose work we admire are nothing more than sexual predators. Pretending that Playboy is 'art' isn't participating in that debate. It's the intellectual equivalent of running about with Darth Vader helmet back to front on one's head.

As for Cooper's discussion on the Bunny Girls and "empowerment", well, it's nice he's giving us permission to decide for ourselves but, really, when is Cooper going to participate in an activity which "empowers" him? Because, I'd really like to hear someone use that word on an activity men are required to participate in to be considered valuable.

And, honestly, how do you even unpack the following twaddle:
"There are many domestic issues in the US that bother me, such as gay rights or fighting for the legalisation of marijuana. But as we go global we need to stand for more important issues internationally. Women's rights in the Middle East and internet censorship in China are two things we can stand for and have an influence in, especially when we're coming into these emerging markets like India and we're faced with the challenge of opening up Playboy clubs where the bunnies can't even wear bunny outfits. You have these countries which are in a very similar place sexually – especially when it comes to gender roles – where the US was when my dad first started."
"Faced with the challenge" of opening in markets where women aren't allowed to wear Bunny outfits? I genuinely don't what to stay except that's a whole load of  nincompoopery which is seriously missing the point, not to mention just a teensy bit of orientalist discourse. That's without mentioning the whole issue of women's rights currently being destroyed in the US with access to abortion being curtailed everywhere and gang-rapes like that in Steubenville being a whole lot more common than many would like to believe. Or, that internet censorship isn't only in China. Why is it important for women in other countries to have the right to dress in Bunny outfits when American women wearing Bunny outfits are slut-shamed? How is expanding the Playboy empire going to help women? What has the legalisation of marijuana got to do with large swathes of the planet not having basic human rights like access to clean water? 

Being raised in the Playboy mansion [and the house next door where his mother lived] can't have been a healthy place for two young boys to grow up. I don't think its all that surprising that Cooper's brother Marston has a recent conviction for domestic violence. Whatever your opinion of porn, it isn't ever appropriate for children and the two boys would have been exposed during Playboy "parties", photo shoots and the filming of the Girls Next Door. These would not have been simply nude women. The Playboy empire is built on porn.

Christie Hefner, Cooper's older sister, ran the company until 2009 when she stepped down. She oversaw the expansion of the empire out of the magazine industry and she put an end to some of Hugh's more egregious behaviours, at least ones financially supported by the company. Cooper may not want to wear his father's pyjamas but neither he nor his brother Marsten come across as well-rounded men with a respect for women and women's sexuality. I don't agree with many of Christie Hefner's expansion policies, and I certainly find the show Girls Next Door deeply creepy, but I'm quite certain that Christie Hefner wanted to run a business. I'm not sure that's what Cooper or Marston are looking for.
Read More
Posted in #culturalfemicide, #EverydaySexism, #rapeculture, Celebrity Culture, Domestic Violence, Hyper-masculinity, hyper-sexuality, Male Violence Against Women, Misogyny, Objectification of Women, Patriarchal Fuckability Test, Porn Culture, Pornography, War on Women | No comments

Friday, 21 December 2012

Playboy goes Artistic.

Posted on 13:11 by Unknown

At least, that's what they claim to be doing by having some "leading contemporary artists",  a list which includes Tracey Emin, "explore the female body as a work of art". Normally, I'd be willing discuss the issue of the female body as art and whether or not it could be anything other than the objectification of women's bodies, but this is Playboy.

Playboy. 

They aren't interested in art. They are interested in making money by the sexual degradation and objectification of women's bodies. This is just another desperate ploy to differentiate them from 'bad' pornographers. In many ways, Playboy's mainstreaming of pornography has been far more detrimental to women's rights than the more violent pornography now available online.

I would rant further but Exiled Stardust has deconstructed this far more eloquently here.
Read More
Posted in fashion-beauty complex, feminism, hyper-sexuality, Male Entitlement, Porn Culture, Pornography, Violence against Women | No comments

Saturday, 17 November 2012

Eat Battery Farmed Chickens and Save Women: Challenging PETA's Reinforcement of Rape Culture

Posted on 08:12 by Unknown

I know that this flies in the face of common sense and compassion but bear with me here. PETA’s campaigns are based on the idea that the objectification, sexualisation, and torture of women's bodies are a great way to raise awareness of animal rights. They glamorise, romanticise and eroticise Violence against Women because they refuse to either acknowledge the construction of “woman as object” within the Patriarchy, or take responsibility for the harm they cause to women by their campaigns. PETA usually uses the bodies of young, thin, blonde, white women as a canvas for their protest. Whilst their protests garner public attention, it isn’t because people are interested in animal rights. PETA have become a spectacle; their message lost in medium of their protest. PETA also seem to have completely forgotten what exactly they have been campaigning for and instead have become obsessed with out-porning the porn industry in their objectification of tortured women’s bodies.

PETA’s newest campaign is called “Fur Trim is Unattractive” and it has been getting considerable amount of press for both the level of misogyny and the generalised nincompoopery within it. It isn’t a new campaign though. It is yet another recycled campaign designed to shock; despite being neither original nor interesting. It's the normal "women with pubic hair are unfuckable" motif, as evidenced by the entire porn industry. One would have thought that an organisation who campaigns against the cosmetic industry's animal testing practises might be aware of the links between pornography, the fashion-beauty complex, and the unnecessary torture of animals. One would be wrong. The very last thing PETA is, is self-aware. Nor do they care that they are supposedly campaigning to prevent the torture of animals by financially profiting from the torturing the bodies of vulnerable women in porn.

Whilst it is undoubtedly unpleasant, the “Fur is Unattractive” campaign is actually rather tame for PETA. Over the past few years, their campaigns and street protests have become increasingly violent and quite deliberate in their use of Violence against Women. They are no longer content with using the bodies of naked women or even carving up women’s bodies as if we were meat. This year alone they have had one advertisement, developed for the Superbowl, banned for having women simulate sex with vegetables; an ad which was only marginally less offensive from Voina’s ‘protest’ art involving women having sex with frozen chickens. Their second ad campaign this year, entitled ‘Boyfriend Went Vegan and Knocked the Bottom out of Me’, should have been called An Ode to Violence Against Women: The Romance Period. It features a physically and sexually assaulted woman wearing a neck brace and covered in bruises because her boyfriend, newly vegan, has pounded her in every way possible. Apparently some of the unfortunate consequences of veganism and the subsequent “mind-blowing intercourse” are “sex injuries such as whiplash, pulled muscles, rug burn, and even a dislocated hip.” That isn't sex. It is rape.

A third campaign developed this year to celebrate World Vegan Day involves a large number of men gyrating, in increasingly more violent ways, with vegetables in place of their penis. Surprisingly, nothing makes me want to give up bacon like a Dude with a cucumber for a penis, or so I'm lead to believe. I'm not entirely sure what PETA was aiming for with this but this is pretty much the definition of creepy:

“A cucumber has never looked so good – or so wicked. In honour of World Vegan Day, watch this spicy video that gives a wink to the sexual health benefits of going vegan by showcasing men enthusiastically and proudly showing off some healthy protrusions from their trousers.”
PETA have pretty much become a parody of themselves. It would be amusing if it weren't for their constant perpetuation and perpetration of rape culture.

So, I say we start eating battery-farmed chickens to raise awareness of the objectification, sexualisation and torture of women's bodies. After all, PETA doesn't care how it raises awareness or who funds its campaigns, so why should feminists? PETA have gone so far as to develop their own porn channel to supposedly raise awareness of the abuse of animals. You don't see feminist groups raising funds by offering to kill rabbits live on the web; perhaps we should.

I believe PETA's advertising campaigns buy into the hyper-sexualised and hyper-masculinised culture in which women are treated as no more than Patriarchal fucktoys. PETA support, perpetuate, and perpetrate rape culture.

So, if PETA wants to reduce the discourse on animal cruelty to simply objectifying women as an advertising tool and encouraging rape culture, I'm going to start buying battery-farmed chickens.
Read More
Posted in #rapeculture, Boycott, Domestic Violence, fashion-beauty complex, Male Violence Against Women, Misogynistic Advertising, Objectification of Women, Patriarchal Fuckability Test, PETA, Porn Culture, Pornography | No comments

Tuesday, 13 November 2012

Pippa Middleton: Today's Object of Derision.

Posted on 04:33 by Unknown


So, Pippa Middleton wrote a book. About party tips. Which no one is buying. Because, let's be realistic here, it's a stupid book for which she was grossly over-paid. So, obviously, Middleton deserves all of the vitriol and hatred currently being thrown her way. 

Or not.

I'm going to go with not because, whilst I think agreeing to write this book was a serious piece of nincompoopery on the part of both Middleton and Penguin, it's not really constructive to make this about her ass or to call her stupid or any of the other myriad of insults out there. If Middleton were my friend, I would have told her to skip the book as it was only ever going to end badly, regardless of the contents. She was appallingly treated following her sister's marriage. The objectification and sexual harassment Middleton received was unbearable. No one should be lining up to insult and belittle Middleton on behalf of the Patriarchy. Criticise her decision to write the book, by all means, but don't resort to asinine insults or baseless slurs. It demeans us all.

Read More
Posted in feminism, Objectification of Women, Patriarchal Conformity, Porn Culture, Sexual Harassment, Sexual Violence, Violence against Women | No comments

Saturday, 10 November 2012

Lana Del Ray's Ride

Posted on 05:07 by Unknown

I have only recently come across Lana Del Ray and that is only due to the Feminist backlash to her being named GQ's Woman of the Year and being the only winner to be nude on the cover. Coincidentally, she was the only woman. It's fairly obvious that her value to GQ was for her body rather than her career as a talented musician; a situation which isn't exactly abnormal in the music industry. Today, for the first time, I have actually watched one of Del Ray's music videos: Ride. I came across whilst researching the backlash to No Doubt's newest video for my piece of Victoria Secret's cultural appropriation of the Plains Indian' warbonnet which is frequently used as a cultural signifier for the entire Native Peoples, First Nations, Metis and Inuit of North America. The reductive use of the warbonnet as a cultural signifier is, simply, racist so I was disappointed to see yet another female singer using the Plains Indian warbonnet as part of their sexualised eroticisation of abuse.



Lana Del Ray's video is beautifully deconstructed here and here. There is very little I can add to these deconstructions except to say how incredibly depressing and distressing I find the eroticisation of sexual abuse and the forced prostitution of women's bodies. It is that same old "the child is responsible for their own abuse and continuing self-harm as an adult" with no contextualisation whatsoever of how the adult woman came to be in trapped in self-destructive behaviour. The video features Del Ray as a "wild child" who "believes in the country American used to be". Manifest Destiny anyone? The whole issue racism exhibited by Del Ray running about being "crazy" in a Plains Indian warbonnet aside, the video is an incredibly disturbing tribute to the sexual abuse of a young woman at the hands of many men, most of whom are old enough to be her father. It is both racist and misogynist and Del Ray is far too talented for this type of shit.





Read More
Posted in #supportingwomenartists, Cultural Appropriation, hyper-sexuality, Misogyny, Misogyny in Music, Porn Culture, Racism, Rape Culture, Sexual Violence | No comments

Victoria Secrets' Annual Demonstration of Misogyny: This Time With a Side of Racism

Posted on 04:09 by Unknown

Victoria Secret's annual Fashion Show is testimony to the mainstreaming of the pornification of women's bodies. It represents everything which is wrong in the Patriarchy rendering women not only into objects for men to wank over but commodifying their bodies with the woman given the honour of wearing a $2.5 million dollar diamond studded bra considered The Ultimate Woman. It isn't so much a fashion show as a live action soft porn show with titillating photos of the models leaked online prior to the broadcast. I won't link any here but the images are the same poses as found in Playboy or any other mainstream soft porn magazine. Victoria Secret's trades on an image of respectability despite the fact that it uses the same techniques as porn to entice men. They reinforce rape culture by parading women in their underwear for male audiences. They are not selling underwear to women but the image of fuckable women to men who then by the underwear for their partners who can not be expected to look like the models who routinely go on crash diets involving only liquids in the run-up to the show so they don't look "fat". It normalises the Patriarchal Fuckability Test on women who have no hope of passing it.

The women-hating and exploitation of Victoria Secret's has become so common place that I don't even notice them anymore but this year they added racism to their bow. One of the themes of the production this year was the calendar and November was represented by a white model wearing a fairly racist signifier of "Indian". The use of a Plains Indian Warbonnett as a signifier for all Native Americans, First Nations, Metis and Inuit people is racist because it is reductive. You can not reduce huge, disparate cultures down to one item which was worn by men who had earned the honour and pretend it isn't anything but culturally insensitive. The cultural appropriation of such item on the objectified body of a white woman is doubly insensitive.

It really isn't that hard to take ten minutes and think about cultural appropriation. It isn't that hard to think about the links of a nearly naked white woman dressed in cultural signifiers of 'Indians' when Native American women are 2.5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted than any other group of women in the US. The majority of the perpetrators of this sexual violence are non-Native men. Yet, the representation of white women dressed in outfits sexualising a construction of Native Americans derived from racist discourse in 'Cowboy and Indian' films has become a trope in our visual culture, one which has been repeated multiple time in the last couple of months. Lana Del Ray's latest video is possibly the most offensive of the recent insurgence in cultural appropriation; interestingly she seems to have received far less backlash than No Doubt or Victoria Secrets. Whilst I don't think No Doubt's apology is a proper apology what with the whole we have non-white friends trope being called up, they at least seem to understand that they have caused offence. Neither Del Ray nor Victoria Secret's appears to have understood at all. No Doubt pulled the video within days of the complaints arising. It seems unbelievably arrogant for Victoria Secrets not to take 10 minutes to rethink the outfit a week later.

And, FFS, using a cultural signifier for 'Indian' in the month of year where the major American holiday is a celebration of their genocide seems, I don't know, really fucking stupid. 
Read More
Posted in #supportingwomenartists, Cultural Appropriation, fashion-beauty complex, Genocide, hyper-sexuality, Male Violence Against Women, Misogyny, Misogyny in Music, Objectification of Women, Patriarchal Conformity, Patriarchal Fuckability Test, Porn Culture, Racism, Rape, Rape Culture, Sexual Violence | No comments

Thursday, 25 October 2012

The New Minnie Mouse: Just Reinforcing the Patriarchal Fuckability Test

Posted on 04:45 by Unknown

I was fairly creeped out by these "sexed up" Sesame Street character costumes for women. I can't think of anything worse than women dressing up as "sexy" versions of children's cartoon characters. Turns out I'm really naive because there is a whole industry of selling these kinds of costumes. I don't get how this is even remotely sexual and I would rather scrub these images right out of my brain. The thing is lots of retailers, including Amazon, sell these kinds of costumes. If you google search Minnie Mouse costumes, you will get links to these kinds of outfits. They are easily available for all kids to find. It's just another way sexualise childhood for girls.


I also don't think it's difficult to over-emphasise the problematic relationship between these kinds of costumes and the "new" Minnie Mouse campaign of Barneys New York. She is ultra thin, tall and glamorous. She is everything that Minnie Mouse, and the other Disney characters, were not. Despite quite a lot of activism to get Disney and Barneys to stop running this sexualised Minnie Mouse campaign, the companies have dismissed concerns: 
"We are saddened that activists have repeatedly tried to distort a lighthearted holiday project in order to draw media attention to themselves," Disney and Barneys said in a joint statement to the News. 
"They have deliberately ignored previously released information clearly stating this promotion is a three-minute ‘moving art’ video featuring traditional Minnie Mouse in a dreamlike sequence set in Paris where she briefly walks the runway as a model and then happily awakens as her normal self wearing the very same designer dress from the fashion show."
Neither Disney nor Barneys want to acknowledge the problem of the sexualisation of young girls. They see only a 3 minute video where Minnie Mouse pretends to be a model. I see a culture which punishes women who don't conform to the Patriarchal Fuckability Test. I see a culture which prevents little girls from being children by focusing on their appearance rather than their person. I see a culture which tells women they aren't important unless they are pretty. 

Disney and Barneys might think it's just a silly video. I see the increasing pornification of society. It breaks my heart to see little girls being taught that they are worth nothing unless a man wants to fuck them.

There is a petition here requesting that retailers stop selling sexy Halloween costumes for young girls. I don't know what it will change but I signed. Because I wanted my voice to be heard.


Read More
Posted in #EverydaySexism, Harmful Cultural Practises, hyper-sexuality, Misogyny, Objectification of Women, Patriarchal Fuckability Test, Porn Culture, sex entertainment industry | No comments

Wednesday, 24 October 2012

Watch Porn. Cure Breast Cancer

Posted on 10:39 by Unknown

This rocked up on my FaceBook feed and I genuinely thought it was a joke. I couldn't believe that the misogynists were now using breast cancer as a way to promote the use of porn. This is actually what Men's Health writes about Pornhub's campaign:
October is National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, which means every man should do his part in helping to find a cure for the terrible disease that afflicts 1 in 8 U.S. women. And you can start by staring at hot, naked porn stars.
Yep, men can help cure breast cancer by participating in the degradation and objectification of women's bodies. They can help cure breast cancer not by financially supporting cancer research but by financially supporting the rape and torture of women's bodies. And, Pornhub is being totally generous with their campaign and are going to donate a whole penny for the  every thirty videos watched under the two channels "Big Tit's" and "Small Tit's". That's right 1 penny for every 30 videos. Call me cynical, but I'm guessing that that one penny won't cut too much into their profit margins. Thankfully, the charity named on Pornhub's media release, the Susan G Komen Foundation, have refused to take the donation.* 

As ever, I am behind the times since this campaign started on the first of October. I may have been aware of it then and just filed it under "shit that will make me incandescent with rage" and then thought of it no more. I probably would have missed it completely if the link to the article in Men's Health wasn't making the rounds of FB. I can safely say I have never perused that particular magazine before and won't be doing so again. It is an appalling example of heteronormative misogyny. Men's Health is quite clearly just another Lad's mag. This is something I did not need to know. And, seriously in an article on raising money for breast cancer was it absolutely necessary to sneak in a reference to teaching your girlfriend to love porn? Really? In this context, "teaching" sounds a lot like brainwashing. And, calling the (extremely limited) donation "porn pennies" is freaking creepy. Really, really creepy. But, hey, if that doesn't creep you out, this will:* 

Meanwhile, here’s one more awesome way to save breasts: Touch ‘em! Men’s Health partnered with the charity Fuck Cancer, and we want you to pledge to be a gentleman. If you find something fishy on your favorite pair of breasts, you could save a life—90 percent of cancers are curable if caught in stage one. Click the image below and take the pledge to touch some breasts now!**
And, if the above doesn't depress you, Men's Health seems to be running a campaign with a charity called Fuck Cancer called Fuck Cancer: Touch Some Breasts which calls for men to take a pledge on Facebook to touch some breasts to help identify breast cancer in its early stages. Because a bunch of creepy men are so much likely to help identify breast cancer by grabbing their partners breasts. Their is actually no information easily visible on how to check breasts effectively or what the other signs of breast cancer might be so mostly this is just a cheap trick to abuse women's bodies and tell them it's for their own good.

Having read Men's Health's sex tips, I think it is safe to say that none of the staff are having sexually satisfying relationships with their partners. Well, they may be. I suspect their partners might be balancing their cheque books during coitus instead.***

* I may be over-using the word creepy here. It's becoming somewhat of a habit. I promise to invest in a thesaurus tomorrow.

*** There was a link here. I have taken it out. They don't need anymore aattention.

** Men's Health has an article on words not to use during sex. I'm reclaiming coitus because they are too weird for words.


UPDATE: FeministCurrent has written about the problematic breast cancer campaigns here, as has I Blame the Patriarchy here.


Read More
Posted in #EverydaySexism, #waronwomen, feminism, Male Violence Against Women, Misogyny, Objectification of Women, Patriarchal Conformity, Porn Culture, Pornography, Rape Culture, Violence against Women | No comments
Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • #sorryfeminist
    As ever, I'm late to the party on this. By the time I came across the #sorryfeminist Twitter hashtag it was already dominated by anti-f...
  • A Night for Lewis
    [ Reblogged from A Night out for Lewis ] Tickets are now on sale at £20 per person and include arrival drink, buffet, disco. We have an amaz...
  • Snow White and the Huntsman: It was Pretty. And, Erm, It was Pretty.
    Snow White and the Huntsman is an interesting film attempting to play against the Disneyfication of the Princess genre. Supposedly, it'...
  • Monster house: Reinforcing VAW in a Children's Film
    My kids have watched this film a few times while I've pottered about around them listening but not really listening. It is incredibly di...
  • The Round-Up VI: Blogs That Have Inspired Me This Week
    Exotic Girl ... Privilege? via Bananas Are Not The Only Fruit Indigenous Feminism Without Apology via Unsettling America: Decolonisation i...
  • The Netmums Survey: Mark 2
    I know I have already blogged about this but it has made me very, very cross. There is so much wrong with this survey. It's poorly word...
  • 2 More Family Annihilators Being Glorified in the Press
    There have been two murder-suicides this weekend: Jovan Belcher killed his girlfriend Kasandra Perkins before killing himself.  Keith John...
  • On Sisterhood: Kris Radish's The Sunday List of Dreams
    I've blogged incessantly about my love for Kris Radish's My Elegant Gathering of White Snows which is fairly obvious considering I ...
  • Why We Oppose Votes For Men
    This keeps getting retweeted through my feed. It makes me giggle every time.
  • Femen: Not Quite Buying This as a Feminist Protest
    I first heard of the Ukrainian Feminist group  Femen on a news report. Whilst the male journalists discussing Femen were all congratulatory...

Categories

  • #BuyingOnlyMusicByWomen (2)
  • #celebrityculture (9)
  • #culturalfemicide (64)
  • #dickheaddetox (21)
  • #EverydaySexism (38)
  • #EverydayVictimBlaming (3)
  • #FeministFriendlyFilms (5)
  • #IBelieveHer (33)
  • #IDidNotReport (16)
  • #IWD (1)
  • #ListeningOnlyToMusicByWomen (6)
  • #maleviolence (24)
  • #RadFem2013 (5)
  • #rapeculture (84)
  • #ReadingOnlyBooksWrittenByWomen (60)
  • #shoutingback (4)
  • #silentnomore (16)
  • #SilentSunday (19)
  • #supportingwomenartists (7)
  • #waronwomen (87)
  • #WeBelieveYou (36)
  • Abortion (17)
  • Abortion Rights (4)
  • amenorrhea (4)
  • Benevolent Sexism (7)
  • Birth Control (9)
  • Black History Month (1)
  • Body-Shaming (2)
  • Boycott (21)
  • Breastfeeding (8)
  • Bullying Culture (4)
  • Canadian Literature (2)
  • capitalism (1)
  • Caroline Criado Perez (1)
  • Celebrity Culture (28)
  • celebrity endorsement (1)
  • Child abuse (13)
  • Child Maintenance (2)
  • Child Neglect (5)
  • Child Rape (19)
  • Childbirth (4)
  • childcare (1)
  • Children's Films (9)
  • children's literature (6)
  • Children's Movies (1)
  • Compulsory Heterosexuality (4)
  • Cultural Appropriation (4)
  • Cultural Femicide (66)
  • Disablism (11)
  • Divorce (1)
  • Domestic Violence (77)
  • Eating disorders (6)
  • Edinburgh Book Festival (3)
  • Everyday Sexism (4)
  • Exited Women (1)
  • Facebook (2)
  • Fairy Tales (5)
  • Family (1)
  • Family Annihilators (4)
  • fashion-beauty complex (34)
  • Fat-shaming (2)
  • Female Artists (8)
  • Female Genital Mutilation (4)
  • Femen (6)
  • Femicide (5)
  • feminism (123)
  • Feminist Activism (91)
  • Feminist Theory (11)
  • Fertility (1)
  • fibromyalgia (1)
  • Financial Abuse (1)
  • Free Speech (19)
  • Gender Stereotyping (10)
  • Gendercide (14)
  • Gendering Children (11)
  • Genocide (3)
  • Girl Guides (1)
  • Gun Control (1)
  • Halloween (1)
  • Handmaidens (16)
  • Handmaidesn (1)
  • Harmful Cultural Practises (27)
  • Hate Crime (1)
  • Healthcare (3)
  • Heteronormativity (4)
  • Holocaust (3)
  • Homophobia (5)
  • Housing Benefit (1)
  • Human Rights Watch (1)
  • Humanism (1)
  • Hyper-masculinity (22)
  • hyper-sexuality (22)
  • IBelieveHer (1)
  • Infertility (3)
  • Injunctions (2)
  • International Boycotts (1)
  • International Women's Day (1)
  • Intimate Partner Violence (5)
  • JumpMag (3)
  • Language (6)
  • Lesbian separatism (1)
  • Lesbians (1)
  • Lesbophobia (1)
  • literature (6)
  • Louise Mensch (1)
  • Male Entitlement (41)
  • Male Violence (27)
  • Male Violence Against Women (143)
  • manplaining (2)
  • Mass Media (4)
  • Menstruation (1)
  • military-industrial complex (4)
  • Million Women Rise (2)
  • Misandry (1)
  • Miscarriage (1)
  • Misogynistic Advertising (25)
  • Misogynistic Advertising Walk of Shame (27)
  • Misogyny (193)
  • Misogyny in Film (7)
  • Misogyny in Music (4)
  • Misogyny in television (5)
  • Mooncup (2)
  • Motherhood (1)
  • Mumsnet (19)
  • Music by women (3)
  • Netmums (1)
  • Neuroscience (1)
  • Neuroskeptic (1)
  • NIA (3)
  • Nincompoop (18)
  • Nincompoopery (6)
  • Nobel Peace Prize (1)
  • Objectification of Women (56)
  • Olympics (2)
  • Parenting (1)
  • Patriarchal Conformity (35)
  • Patriarchal Fuckability Test (47)
  • Patriarchy (64)
  • PETA (7)
  • Petition (4)
  • Pink Stinks (2)
  • PIV (2)
  • Polanski (2)
  • Porn Culture (16)
  • Pornography (18)
  • Poverty (9)
  • Pregnancy (1)
  • Prostitution (11)
  • Pussy Riot (8)
  • Racism (21)
  • Radical Feminism (19)
  • Rape (53)
  • Rape Crisis Scotland (2)
  • Rape Culture (95)
  • Rape Myths (5)
  • Reality Television (7)
  • Reclaim the Night (2)
  • Reproductive Rights (4)
  • Right to Privacy (2)
  • Roman Polanski (4)
  • School Uniforms (1)
  • Scotland (1)
  • sex entertainment industry (12)
  • Sex Tourism (1)
  • Sex Trafficking (2)
  • Sexist Advertising (16)
  • Sexual Harassment (3)
  • Sexual Violence (59)
  • Silent Sunday (2)
  • Sisterhood (8)
  • Slut-Shaming (17)
  • Slutwalk (3)
  • Stockholm Syndrome (1)
  • Substance Misuse (2)
  • Sudden Infant Death Syndrome [SIDS] (1)
  • teenage pregnancies (1)
  • The Women's Room UK (2)
  • Torture (2)
  • transactivism (1)
  • Transgenderism (2)
  • Transphobic (1)
  • Trident (1)
  • Twitter (2)
  • UK Feminsta (1)
  • Vagenda (1)
  • Vagina (3)
  • Victim Blaming (24)
  • Violence against Women (142)
  • Violence Against Women in Scotland (4)
  • War on Women (81)
  • Welfare State (6)
  • White Supremacy (4)
  • Womanism (2)
  • women (8)
  • Women Academics (1)
  • women and law (2)
  • Women Artists (2)
  • Women Athletes (2)
  • Women Bloggers (23)
  • Women in Prostitution (1)
  • Women Writers (67)
  • women-blaming culture (53)
  • women-only spaces (3)
  • Women's Films (2)
  • women's health (1)
  • Women's History (18)
  • Women's History Month (6)
  • Women's Holocaust Testimonies (1)
  • Women's Liberation (8)
  • Women's Library (1)
  • Women's Literature (24)
  • Women's Music (2)
  • Women's Poetry (7)
  • Women's Rights (17)
  • Women's Stories (5)
  • World Breastfeeding Week (1)
  • World Wildlife Federation (1)

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (260)
    • ▼  August (23)
      • You keep using Humanism. I do not think it means w...
      • Silent Sunday Round-Up: Inspiring and Rage Inducin...
      • This is a hate crime:
      • #slanegirl and why this isn't about female sexual ...
      • Marks & Spencer's uses Womanism to Sell Knickers: ...
      • Proud to be an Extremist Feminist Activist
      • Silent Sunday Round-Up: Inspiring and Rage Inducin...
      • @misogyny_online : A Response
      • White Male Commits Sex Crime but We Should Feel So...
      • Hugo Schwyzer is not a Feminist Redux:
      • The attacks on @misogyny_online
      • A Night for Lewis
      • Silent Sunday: Round Up of Inspiring and Rage Indu...
      • Blame the perpetrator, not the victim:
      • White Dude Has Tantrum As Woman Behaves Inappropri...
      • Expose: David Cameron is the Everyday Victim Blami...
      • A 13 year old girl is a "Sexual Predator" because ...
      • Men Who Just Don't Get Misogyny But Think They Do
      • Twitter, Trolling and Misogynistic Abuse (trigger ...
      • Silent Sunday : Inspiring and Thought Provoking Bl...
      • Gradient Lair on Rape Culture
      • Fathers4Justice, Mumsnet and Me: #shoutingback
      • If you call another woman an "attention-seeker", I...
    • ►  July (33)
    • ►  June (31)
    • ►  May (37)
    • ►  April (32)
    • ►  March (38)
    • ►  February (38)
    • ►  January (28)
  • ►  2012 (240)
    • ►  December (28)
    • ►  November (34)
    • ►  October (50)
    • ►  September (28)
    • ►  August (36)
    • ►  July (33)
    • ►  June (27)
    • ►  May (4)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile